An Agile Process for an e-Training of Trainers on Online Teaching
Mohamed Ali Hadhri
1
and Lilia Cheniti-Belcadhi
2
1
Sousse University, ISGS LAMIDED Research Laboratory, Tunisia
2
Sousse University, ISITC, PRINCE Research Laboratory, Tunisia
Keywords: Conceptual Model, Agile Process, e-Training of Trainers, Remote Online Learning.
Abstract: Assessing As COVID-19 continues spreading in the world, how to keep learning in disruption has become a
challenge to the global education community. Effective academic online support services are oriented for both
teachers and students. In this context an agile process of "Training of Trainers" has been established to assist
teachers designing online resources and e-learning scenarios. In this paper, we provide an overview of the
process of e-training of training conducted during the pandemic crisis for University lecturers. We propose a
formal description of this agile process based on conceptual models, and analyze activities performed by
tutors. These models, evaluated by trainees, promote an in-depth analysis and a detailed description of the
tasks performed by tutor’s support e-training of teachers.
1 INTRODUCTION
As the on-going COVID-19 pandemic continues to
develop in the whole world, many governments closed
schools and universities. In addition, these
governments implemented an emergency educational
support intended to confine students at home, and
asked teachers to adjust their strategies to create online
courses and deliver them through online
communication tools in record time without any
previous preparation.
Given the complexity of the tutor’s involvement in
online courses, it is necessary to well prepare
University teachers for their new role through a well-
established training process. In this paper we will
focus on a formal description of an e-training process
of online teachers. The process of training has been
qualified as agile, as it was adapted to the context of
the various trainees and permitted a continuous
improvement of the training design, through frequent
feedback loops of iterative training routines.
Further to the training, we have proceeded to the
measurement of the process impact on teachers'
Performance by taking a survey to check whether the
trainees acquire, intended online Tutoring skills and
got the opportunity to have faster solutions to
problems, and guidance.
The research in this paper is based on the work of
the authors who were responsible for e-training of
University Teachers (Around 600 teachers) on
mastering design of online courses and online
teaching. The objectives of this paper are contributing
models for agile Process of e-training of Trainers on
online teaching, to build a common understanding for
such training processes and to be able to adapt the
process to training context and needs.
The paper is structured as follows: In the next
section, we will present our research context and
objectives. Section three permits to describe the agile
training process conducted and the models
elaborated. In section 4 we present the way the
training process was evaluated, and the lessons
learned. We finish our paper by presenting a
conclusion and our future work towards this research
topic.
2 RESEARCH CONTEXT
In this paper, we conducted a literature review in
order to analyze the state-of-the-art of agile process
with strong focus on training process description and
learner involvement. The agile methodology has been
introduced by instructors in academic environment
due to the success of agile in industry where students
are working with realistic project through which they
learn agile concepts more efficiently (Monett, 2013),
Therefore in (Stewart, 2009), by drawing up an
equivalence table between principles of the Agile
manifesto and the pedagogical Environment, authors
Hadhri, M. and Cheniti-Belcadhi, L.
An Agile Process for an e-Training of Trainers on Online Teaching.
DOI: 10.5220/0011125700003182
In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2022) - Volume 1, pages 609-616
ISBN: 978-989-758-562-3; ISSN: 2184-5026
Copyright
c
 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
609

showed that Agile methods improves learning
outcomes by delivering the just useful material
teaching in accordance with variable student’s needs.
On the other hand, Authors in (Sureshchandra, 2008)
insight on the role of agile coach to assist the project
team to adopt the agile mindset and reject waterfall
methods by following iterations and practices. This
was also the case in (Chun, 2004), where an « Agile
teaching/learning methodology » was used for
teaching technical courses based on Learn by
Sharing, Teach How to Learn and Frequent feedback
loops that contribute to a continuous improvement of
the course design, despite additional effort in process,
coordination, teamwork and perceptions in a social
context (Stettina, 2013). In a previous work we have
proposed a meta-model that constitutes a theoretical
framework for describing active e-course and
translates a mapping between the techniques used in
face-to-face active courses and those used in online
courses (Belcadhi, 2015). We have also provided in a
previous research work a modelling of the tutor
functions in online learning (Belcadhi, 2014). Further
to our deep experience in deployment of virtual
learning, we can confirm that virtual learning
environment does not guarantee the achievement of
learning objectives if it is not managed properly and
requires an appropriate system design composed by
methods, approaches and assessments and specially
during pandemic time (Mundiri 2021. Besides,
converting face-to-face courses to an online course
requires skillful pedagogical adjustments and proper
technology support that most of trainers were unware
(Chen, 2021). We therefore observe that an agile
coaching may assist inexperienced tutors in this
pandemic outbreak
In order to measure the Impact of Agile Coaching
on Students’ Performance (Rodriguez, 2016) take a
survey confirming that students acquire non-technical
skills in addition to highly necessary skills of
teamwork, communication, and management. Based
on the deep literature review that we conducted, we
aim, in the current work, to establish UML based
conceptual models for an enhanced understanding of
the agile process of e-training of trainers for online
teaching. This process will describe trainers’ tasks.
The models can subsequently be used as references
for trainers, and as a framework for a better
assessment of the work they carry out. Maintaining
the Integrity of the Specifications
2.1 Modelling Framework of Agile
Training Process
In this work we pose the question how to provide a
description of the stages of a meta training of trainer’s
process taking into consideration digital pedagogy
specificities. A possible answer for this question is
offered below. We propose our adopted approach to
validate the elaborated Modelling process.
In order to prevent contagion from COVID-19
virus, many measures were taken to ensure for
students a pedagogical continuity during confinement
by providing online coursesvia Online Learning
platform. The pedagogical team of trainers of trainers,
a model to provide distance training for teachers. The
pedagogical team is composed of:
 A technical team responsible for the management
and administration of a Learning Management
System (LMS) platform (Moodle as current
solution).
 A national coordinator having for role preparing
and supervising e-learning outcomes.
 A department head of virtual education in the
University (DVE).
 A team of e-learning correspondents (CEL)
assigned to different institutions who assist their
colleagues to create their own online course space
by providing them technical support, resources,
problem resolution and allow each student access
to the dedicated space to follow the courses and
benefit from educational support services.
 A coordinator of CEL online responsible for
coordinating with the previous actors.
At the beginning, the main objective was to give
lecturers in a lapse of time (1 week) the most useful
tools and techniques to create their educational online
space (LMS) and ensure interactions with their
students, but we were faced with other unpredictable
circumstances and were obliged to remote manage
and lead teams with different profiles. Therefore, we
must express agility and goodwill in Teaching staff
management. Since the scope of this training session
should be adjusted to trainers’ requirements. So, we
propose an iterative and incremental model for e-
training of trainers (Figure 1).
Indeed, a model is a simplified representation
identifying interactions between various elements.
We may identify two main categories ‘‘descriptive
models’’ and ‘‘Prescriptive models’’. Descriptive
models presents an existing situation, whereas the
second type of models represent an ideal solution for
a given context. Initially, our approach is descriptive
as the study is based on our involvement in an e-
learning experience as trainers of trainers. These
models can also be considered in a prescriptive way
as they establish a theoretical framework which offers
guidelines to be followed by a trainer .
EKM 2022 - 5th Special Session on Educational Knowledge Management
610

Figure 1: The Meta Training of Trainers Model.
Since we are faced to a project with fixed
resources and time and with a dynamic process we
have therefore adapted our proceeding quickly and
verified the evidence of obtained value in the same
iteration.
In our case, the phase of testing was performed
twice successively by different actors of the
pedagogical team. As a result, the ToT model was
based on the following stages:
Stage 1: Define Objectives
The ToT model process starts with the definition of
the problem statement that we want to solve. This will
form the basis of potential solutions and objectives to
reach.
In our case, the main objective is to assist trainers
for a period of one week to get some pedagogical and
technical skills in order to manage their online course
spaces and ensure continuity with their students.
These objectives are fixed by the DVE and
communicated to the CCEL and CELs.
Stage 2: Deploy Strategy
In the second stage, we shift from identifying
objectives to exploring solutions and prioritizing the
items. we referred back to the definition of the main
objective for describing the content of the training
session like technical support, type of pedagogical
resources, activities to realize, specific objectives,
communication tools, planning of meetings,
indicators to be reached and proceeding of the
training session.
These items are integrated in a training space
course created by the DVE and managed by the
CCEL. Hence, all the CELs and the trainers were
enrolled in this space towards accessing pedagogical
resources.
Stage 3: Experimentation
Now, in this step the conceived strategy will be turned
into something tangible which can be experimented
on trainers and get their feedback. That’s why we
focus here on targeted actions and accurate planning
to test the running experiments and evaluating them.
Every team of trainers is assigned to a CEL who
will assist them, moderate online meetings,
communicate with them, answer their questions and
undertake significant data about the progress of the
training session and report it to the CCEL.
Stage 4: Monitoring
During the monitoring phase, we observed our target
users as they interacted with activities, resources and
their teams. We verified if targets are achieved, the
source of blocking points, the new requirements and
skills and how trainers felt throughout the training
session. On the other hand, CELs were asked to
perform monitoring which consists of checking the
degree of achievement of each item of the predefined
objectives and detect possible malfunctions by
supervising the flow of trainer’s posts, the degree of
achievement of activities and measuring
performance.
Stage 5: React
At the end, the Monitoring phase highlights any flaws
or imperfections that need to be improved. This stage
may assess the initial objectives, revisit their
definition in the first stage or adapt the proceeding
through more strategy deployment sessions before
attending the expected result. However, the reaction
about all kinds of events is done on two levels, the
first managed by each CEL who adjusted some minor
technical details of the training without affecting the
main objectives and the second referring to adapt the
training proceeding by revisiting target priorities,
adding new pedagogical resources or deploying
technical solutions. These decisions are made by
DVE after periodic online meetings with CELs and
CCEL.
2.2 Modelling Agile Process
We use UML for modeling, specifying, visualizing,
constructing, and documenting the components of our
system: The online TOT Agile Process.
2.2.1 Use Case Modelling
We are introducing the concept of the use case
diagram in UML with a view to specify the expected
behaviour of the system without carrying about how
it will happen. In this context, the actions performed
by actors are described by visual and textual
representation (Figure 2).
An Agile Process for an e-Training of Trainers on Online Teaching
611

Figure 2: Use Case Diagram of the meta TOT model.
In the following, we present the Use case textual
description:
 Use Case Name: e-training of trainers
 Goal: Ensuring pedagogical continuity for
trainers and assisting them for managing their
space courses
 Actors: DV, CCEL, CELs and Trainers.
 Preconditions: The trainers are enrolled on E-
learning platform, the training space is created,
and the communication is effected online
 Post conditions
o collected data from training session,
o satisfaction survey of trainers,
o enriched space course for every trainer.
 Normal Flow
The process will follow these steps:
1. Each training session lasted one week; a first
version of the training space was allocated with
the following contents:
 Introduction to LMS,
 Management of the course space,
 How to add resources,
 How to use communication tool for interactions,
 Access control of the course space.
2. A call for subscription is announced for
University’s teachers by mailing list and social
network. Those who are interested have to fulfill
a form with personal information and describe
their level of mastering online educational tools.
3. 24 hours before the start of the training session,
the CEL’s coordinator send a mail for pre-
registered teachers announcing: (i) the program
of the training session, (ii) the key date of
important events and (iii) the provisional
planning of synchronous meetings grouped by
institute and moderated by each CEL.
4. Then, every CEL was assigned to a teacher’s
team, and he sent them a mail announcing the
effective start of the training session, updating
the schedule of the synchronous meetings.
Finally, he/she saved the list of registered
teachers with the title of their course spaces
5. For each training session, 3 synchronous
meetings were planned. Each CEL had been
asked to send an invitation for this event at least
24 hours before by email and by forum
mentioning the communication tool he plans to
use, the date and the agenda of the meeting.
6. During the meeting, the CEL is in interaction
with teachers responding to their requests about
technical or pedagogical proceedings, looking
for their expectancy and paying attention to their
future needs.
7. All these suggestions and remarks were included
in the Minutes (Reports) attached in a first email
to the coordinator of CEL and in a second email
to the teachers provided with the link of the
meeting record and summary of the main topics
discussed during the chat.
8. At the end of each meeting (CEL/teachers), the
coordinator of CEL collects the various reports
of the different teams, made a synthesis and
planned an online meeting with CELs in order to
discuss the current conduct of the training
session.
9. During the meeting (CCEL / CEL), the
participants raise topics of faced difficulties,
technical problems, and the envisaged
recommendations to adapt the pedagogical
resources according to the new needs of teachers
and included in a report intended to the DVE.
10. The concretization of these tips was tested in the
rest of the training session and the degree of the
achievement of the predefined objectives were in
perpetual control until the next online meeting
where actions will be validated or readapted for
the next training session.
11. At the end of the training session, participants
receive an email announcing the cloture of the
session and are asked to fill out an evaluation
sheet assessing the program.
EKM 2022 - 5th Special Session on Educational Knowledge Management
612

2.2.2 Activity Diagram
Activity diagram shows the order in which stages are
realized to achieve the use case’s targets. It describes
the dynamic aspect of the system, and it shows the
transition from one activity to the next (Figure 3).
Figure 3: The Activity Diagram of the meta TOT model.
In order to maximize transparency of key information
for inspection, we represent the value and the output
of sprints by the following artifacts:
 The product backlog is all the requirements
collected to realize the objectives of the training
session like features, functions, improvements,
and fixes,
 The sprint backlog constitutes all the elements
that were selected at the start of the sprint (in sprint
planning) with the aim of meet the objective of the
sprint and increment the product with new things,
 The scrum increment represents all the "done"
elements of the current sprint in addition to those
already finalized in previous sprints,
 Definition of done defines all the criteria that will
allow the scrum team to confirm that an item (user
story for example) can be considered "done.
Scrum defines ceremonies or events (table 1) that
occur inside each Sprint used to create a routine and
also to minimize any other meeting other than those
predefined.
Table 1: A mapping of artefacts Scrum/online TOT domains.
Scrum domain Online TOT domain
Product
Owner
A department head of virtual education in
Universit
y
Scrum Team A team of e-learning correspondents (CEL)
Scrum Master A coordinator CEL(rotating role within the
team
)
Development
p
latform
A LMS platform such as <Moodle>
Product course spaces implemented on Moodle
Product
b
acklo
g
pedagogical, technical objectives
Sprint (1 week) is the long development of training
session
Sprint backlog Selected set of predefined objectives
Task An e-learning activity e.g. animation chat,
insert resources
Table 2: The components of the Sprint.
Start
Initial Objectives of the training session:
-Introduction to LMS
- Management of the course space
- How to add resources
-How to use communication tool for interaction
-Access control of the course space
Product
backlog
Sprint backlog Increment
Definition of
Done
S
p
rint 1
N/A
Initial
Objectives:
-Introduction to
LMS
-Management o
f
course space
-An use
r
a
ccount to the
L
MS
-personal
c
ourse Space
E
very teache
r
c
an access his
a
ccount.
E
very teache
r
c
an define the
structure of his
space course
S
p
rint 2
N/A New features:
-How to create
accounts for
teachers.
-How to help
teachers access
to their course
space
Initial
Objectives:
-How to add
resources
-How to use
communication
tool for
interactions
Increment
of Sprint 1
-An user
account to
the LMS
-A personal
course Space
Increment
of Sprint 2
-Video
Tutorials and
guides
-Updated
Spaces
-Planning’s
A
ccess to LMS
for all the
b
eneficiaries of
t
he training
E
nriched course
space
A
ll teachers
a
ttend at least
o
ne online
m
eeting
A
ll teachers
c
reate and
m
oderate
c
ommunication
t
ools (forum,
c
hat…)
S
p
rint 3
N/A New features
how to create
online
assessments
how to integrate
websites on LMS
How to
manipula-te
visioconference
tools
Initial
Objectives:
Access control of
the course space
Increment
of Sprint 1
Increment
of Sprint 2
Increment
of Sprint 3
-Video
Tutorials
created
Quizz
-created
groups of
students
-Video
T
utorials an
d
g
uides
Quizz are
c
reated an
d
i
ntegrated
w
ebsites are
i
ntegrated
-groups an
d
r
oles affected to
c
ourse
An Agile Process for an e-Training of Trainers on Online Teaching
613

we have determined the actors in the previous
diagrams, we notified that these actors were
competent, self-organizing and cross-functional, and
we recommend to them which tools to choose to
accomplish their work. We, therefore, can consider
these actors as a scrum team asked to deliver products
iteratively and incrementally, maximizing
opportunities for feedback and we propose a mapping
between the two domains (table 2).
Table 3: The ceremonies and events of scrum.
Sprint
/
Level
Event objective duration Actors tool
1/1
M
eta
t
raining
Sprint
planning
organize the
scrum sprint that
will be startin
g
.
2 h
D
VE
C
CEL
C
EL
Mail
Daily scrum revealing the
blocking points
and the state of
proceeding
15 min
every
day
D
VE
C
CEL
C
ELs
Mail
social
network
Product
backlog
Refinement
refine the content
of the Product
Backlog and
organize the next
S
p
rint
p
ro
p
erl
y
30 min
C
CEL
C
ELs
online
meeting
sprint review
t
ake stock of what
item was
achieved during
the level 2 of
sprint and get
constructive
feedbac
k
30 min
C
CEL
C
ELs
Online
meeting
sprint
retrospective
thinking about
new activities for
continuous
im
p
rovement
30 min
DVE
CCEL
CELs
online
meeting
Minutes
1/2
T
raining
o
f trainers
Sprint
planning
Announcing the
user stories of the
product backlog
belonging to the
s
p
rint.
N/A
CELs Mail
Daily scrum revealing some
technical
difficulties and
pedagogical
re
q
uirements
continuou
s
CEL
trainers
forum
on
LMS
mail
Product
backlog
Refinement
Proposal
recommendations
for refining the
content of the
Product Backlog
for the next Sprint
p
ro
p
erl
y
continuou
s
CELs Mail
sprint review Verifying the
DOD of each
item of the sprint
p
lannin
g
15 min
CELs LMS
sprint
retrospective
proposal of new
activities for
continuous
im
p
rovement
continuou
s
CELs
LMS
2.3 Scrum Units
Agile methodologies are inspired from the “Agile
manifesto”. So, we’ve adapted the “agile manifesto”
for “online coach agile manifesto”. We propose an
agile process to support trainers to acquire skills by
doing it and helping others do it (Figure 4). Through
this paper we have succeeded to value:
1. Collaboration and interactions over
communication tools
2. Pedagogical skills over technical skills on LMS
3. Trainer-satisfaction survey over e-learning
outcomes
4. React to a new need over Following a plan.
Figure 4: Meta training of TOT model.
3 TESTING OF THE MODEL
We designed a survey that allowed us to validate the
established formal modelling for the agile ToT
process. The survey has been distributed to learners,
enrolled in the training. The models constitute a
theoretical framework for conducting the
instructional design of Meta-ToT processes.
The research methodology can be divided into
three parts. In the first part, we designed and
elaborated a questionnaire that allowed us to validate
the agile process. In the second part, we conducted
the ToT and distributed the questionnaire to learners,
who participated in the training. In the third part, we
collected information from learners and proceeded to
their analysis to permit an evaluation of our pilot test
case study and therefore a validation of our Process
for ToT. The model that we have adopted permitted
us to train around 600 University teachers from our
university, belonging to 17 High Education
institutions and faculties and enabled us to support
them in preparing their lessons on digital media and
hosting them in the course spaces created on the
distance learning platform.
3.1 Questionnaire: Design and
Procedure
A Likert-scale questionnaire has been elaborated and
distributed to 600 online learners with the aim of
studying the impact of this training process on the
learners. The evaluation of this process is supported
by quantitative and qualitative data collected through
teachers’ surveys.
The survey was composed of 10 items, including
questions on the training experience, objectives of the
EKM 2022 - 5th Special Session on Educational Knowledge Management
614

training session, impact on the new methods of
teaching, and acquired skills. The questionnaire was
made available online via email or social network at
the end of each session of training. We received 190
answers.
The evaluation cohort was mainly composed of
junior teachers as shown through the following graph
(Figure 5), which shows that the majority of the
trainees are assistant professors. This can be
explained by the fact that this new generation of
teachers is more oriented to the use of ICT in learning
and motivated to discover innovative approaches for
teaching. Besides this population, is encouraged to
attend pedagogical training so that these teachers will
be able to better tutor their learners. Also some senior
teachers attended the training.
Figure 5: Pilot Cohort profile.
3.2 Data Analysis and Results
In the following we present the results of our
conducted evaluation of the agile process of TOT. In
this section, we outline the analysis of the answers
given by learners to the questionnaire and the
obtained results. The results of the questions
presented in the questionnaire have been deeply
analysed. Responses to all Lickert-scale questions in
the questionnaire and concise observations of learners
were collected into a single document. Raw data
functioned as the essential unit of analysis.
The first aspect that we have evaluated was the
degree of satisfaction of trained teachers towards the
training offered and more precisely, the training
content delivered, the access to the Learning
Management System, the support provided by their
trainers and the synchronous tools used. The majority
of the learners were very satisfied regarding these
aspects (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Satisfaction regarding Agile Training Process.
The second aspect that we have evaluated was the
content of the training. We first checked whether the
intended competences were acquired by the end of the
training (Figure. 8), and we then gathered the opinion
of the learners concerning the learning resources
delivered during the training (Figure 7).
Figure 7: Acquired Competences through Training Process.
Figure 8: Satisfaction regarding the content of the ToT.
The third aspect was related to learners’ satisfaction
towards training methodology. Most of the learner
appreciated the training methodology and way the
training occurred (Figure 9).
Figure 9: Satisfaction regarding the ToT methodology.
Figure 10: Learning Objectives achievement.
The fourth and last aspect that we assessed was
related to the motivation of the learners towards
online learning further to this ToT process. The first
evaluation was in relation to the achievement of the
objectives and their relevance to the training (Figure
10), and the second evaluation was regarding the
motivation of the learners to be involved in eLearning
projects (Figure11).
Figure 11: Motivation for e-learning.
127
120
119
83
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
preapringforonlineteaching
Acquiree‐learningskills
increasedigitalvisibility
enrichonlinecoursespace
An Agile Process for an e-Training of Trainers on Online Teaching
615

Most learners were very motivated by the end of
the training and found that they have achieved their
objectives, particularly in deploying their courses.
4 RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION
The Agile Training process model is composed of 3
sprints. Each sprint is related to the Training session
described through its context users, activities,
training process implemented, and conducted
iterations. The models were validated through
questionnaires and investigated learner satisfaction
with the way e-training was deployed. The survey
looks for: “Quality of training content and
methodology», «Competence acquisition” and
“future work as online tutor”. The results were very
encouraging and showed that e-training objectives
have been achieved. The proposed formal description
of the agile process in this paper leads us to stress the
importance of such a preliminary training of
university teachers before the start of their online
courses. Besides they were able to develop highly
necessary skills of teamwork, communication, and
management, to enhance e-learning culture and
improve IT transfer like creation, storage and transfer
of e-learning skills. We finally observe that the ToT
allowed learners to improve digital skills and e-
learning competence. This leads us to confirm that the
agile process answer to learners' needs and adapt the
training content to their field. This Agile practice may
also represent an approach to establish a solution
through dealing with self-organizing trainers to
support the knowledge Management process that
include both explicit and tacit knowledge for a better
management of the training process.
5 CONCLUSION/ PERSPECTIVE
In this research work we have proposed a formal
description of an agile process for training of Trainers
during COVID pandemics and related to eLearning.
Results observed through our pilot experience, have
proven that the agile principles have greatly
contributed to the adoption of e-learning by trainers
ad to the achievement of the established objectives.
This experience was an opportunity to exploit
online training of trainers in the pandemic’s
circumstance and conducted us to explore differently
the potential of the online active training. Our future
research will be focused on the impact of our model
on the improvement of the quality of courses for
students and the asserting of learning experience. We
will also explore the design of an intelligent approach
for a ToT process, to be able to provide adapted agile
ToT processes to various professional contexts.
We suggest further investigation of rules that
describe formally the process and that would be able
to automatically generate recommendations of
activities to accomplish and/or tools to adopt ToT for
specific teachers’ profiles.
REFERENCES
Belcadhi, L. C. & Ghannouchi, S. A. How to Design an Active e-
Course?: Meta Models to Support the Process of Instructional
Design of an Active e-Course. Journal of Information
Technology Research (JITR), 8(1), 82-106.(2015).
Belcadhi, L. C. & Ghannouchi, S. A. Conceptual Design and
Validation of Meta-Model for Active e-Learning.
International Journal of Information and Education
Technology, 4(1), 42.(2014)
Chen, Cindy, et al. "Learners' experience and needs in online
environments: adopting agility in teaching." Journal of
Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (2021).
Chun, A. H. W. The agile teaching/learning methodology and its e-
learning platform. In the International Conference on Web-
Based Learning (pp. 11-18). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
(2004, August)
Monett, D. Agile Project-Based Teaching and Learning. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Software
Engineering Research and Practice (SERP) (p.1). The Steering
Committee of The World Congress in Computer Science,
Computer Engineering and Applied Computing
(WorldComp)(
2013)
Mundiri, Akmal, et al. "Learning agility during pandemic;
outstanding strategy in language learning by using
zoom application." Journal of Physics: Conference
Series. Vol. 1779. No. 1. IOP Publishing, 2021.
Rodríguez, G., Soria, Á., & Campo, M. . Measuring the
impact of agile coaching on students’ performance. IEEE
Transactions on Education, 59(3), 202-209 (2016).
Stettina, C. J., Zhou, Z., Bäck, T., & Katzy, B. . Academic
education of software engineering practices: towards
planning and improving capstone courses based upon
intensive coaching and team routines. In the 2013 26th
Int.l Conf. on Software Engineering Education and
Training (CSEE&T) (pp 169-178). IEEE(2013, May).
Stewart, J. C., DeCusatis, C. S., Kidder, K., Massi, J. R., &
Anne, K. M. . Evaluating agile principles in active and
cooperative learning. Proceedings of Student-Faculty
Research Day, CSIS, Pace University, B3 (2009).
Sureshchandra, K., & Shrinivasavadhani, J.. Moving from
waterfall to agile. In the Agile 2008 conference (pp. 97-
101). IEEE (2008, August).
https://www.scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html#events-sp
rint [last consuted 22/01/2022]
https://www.scrumalliance.org/about-scrum/events [last
consulted the 5/02/2022]
EKM 2022 - 5th Special Session on Educational Knowledge Management
616